Dalarna University's logo and link to the university's website

This contribution discuss avenues for further research by revisiting our previous study on causal directions and strengths between ADHD diagnosis and socioeconomics and ADHD diagnosis and intelligence, respectively, by using a bi-directional two-sample Mendelian randomization design: Inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsiveness constitute essential components for the diagnosis of Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Both the diagnosis and medical treatment of ADHD have become highly prevalent during the last two decades. Still, there are considerable regional differences, both within and between countries, in the proportion of children and adolescents with this neuropsychiatric diagnosis. Previous research have shown associations between ADHD with lower socioeconomic status on the one hand and intelligence on the other hand. Hitherto, there is no established objective biological marker for ADHD. For this interdisciplinary study, we aimed to evaluate these associations' causal directions and strengths using a bi-directional two-sample Mendelian randomization design. We used summary-level data from the most extensive available genome-wide association studies (GWAS) to identify genetic instruments for the diagnosis of ADHD, intelligence, and socioeconomic markers, including the Townsend deprivation index, household income, and educational attainment. Effect estimates from individual genetic variants were combined using inverse-variance weighted regression. Our results indicate that an ADHD diagnosis may be a direct and robust intelligence-independent consequence of socioeconomic-related factors, whereas ADHD appears only to lead to modestly lowered socioeconomic status. Low intelligence seems not to be a significant independent cause or consequence of ADHD. The results of this study raise questions about basic assumptions with long historical roots: 1) how children’s conditions and expressions are interpreted in different contexts, and 2) how aristocratic norms relate to social practice, pedagogical ideals, and neuropsychiatric diagnoses. This contribution discuss further investigations  

Inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsiveness constitute essential components for the diagnosis of Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Both the diagnosis and medical treatment of ADHD have become highly prevalent during the last two decades. Still, there are considerable regional differences, both within and between countries, in the proportion of children and adolescents with this neuropsychiatric diagnosis. Previous research have shown associations between ADHD with lower socioeconomic status on the one hand and intelligence on the other hand. Hitherto, there is no established objective biological marker for ADHD.

For this interdisciplinary study, we aimed to evaluate these associations' causal directions and strengths using a bi-directional two-sample Mendelian randomization design.[1] We used summary‐level data from the most extensive available genome‐wide association studies (GWAS) to identify genetic instruments for the diagnosis of ADHD, intelligence, and socioeconomic markers, including the Townsend deprivation index, household income, and educational attainment. Effect estimates from individual genetic variants were combined using inverse‐variance weighted regression.

Our results indicate that an ADHD diagnosis may be a direct and robust intelligence-independent consequence of socioeconomic-related factors, whereas ADHD appears only to lead to modestly lowered socioeconomic status. Low intelligence seems not to be a significant independent cause or consequence of ADHD.

The results of this study raise questions about basic assumptions with long historical roots: 1) how children’s conditions and expressions are interpreted in different contexts and 2) how aristocratic norms relate to social practice, pedagogical ideals, and neuropsychiatric diagnoses.

Enligt Högskolelagen ska all utbildning vid svenska lärosäten vila på vetenskaplig grund. Sedan år 2021 stipulerar samma förordning att alla lärarutbildningar ska förmedla kunskap om neuropsykiatriska funktionsnedsättningar (NPF). Examensmålet ska säkerställa att examinerade lärare har kompetens att bemöta elever med NPF-diagnoser i skolan och anpassa klassrumssituationen efter olika behov.

Denna statliga styrning har därmed ålagt landets lärosäten att utbilda lärare med vissa specifika förmågor att identifiera, och i samverkan med andra, tillgodose elevers behov av specialpedagogiska insatser för elever med neuropsykiatriska svårigheter. Undervisningen kring det nya examensmålet skall vila på vetenskaplig grund. En fråga som infinner sig är huruvida det exempelvis handlar om den medicinska vetenskapliga grunden, eller om den pedagogiska.

Syftet med detta konferensbidrag är att bidra till en problematisering av NPF i lärarutbildningssammanhang med fokus på hur några av landets lärarutbildningar forskningsförankrar sin undervisning mot detta examensmål. Aktuella forskningsfrågor är a) hur undervisning om NPF bedrivs vid tio av landets lärarutbildningar, och b) vilken vetenskaplig grund som råder för undervisningen.

Via en jämförande analys av relevant undervisningsmaterial, tillika en kompetensinventering från tio av landets lärosäten, presenteras ett underlag för reflektion kring vad som utgör vetenskaplig grund för utbildning mot detta examensmål. Analysen utgår från professionsteori med fokus på professionell autonomi där begreppet organisatorisk professionalism är centralt för analysen.

Ett resonemang om studiens förväntade resultat kan gå i två riktningar. Den första kan innebära att koherens råder mellan landets lärosäten när det gäller såväl undervisning som vetenskaplig grund. En sådan samstämmighet kan förklaras av gemensamma diskussioner vid exempelvis Lärarutbildningskonventets träffar. Den andra riktningen är att landets lärosäten skiljer sig sinsemellan i denna fråga, vilket skulle kunna förklaras av att lokal spetskompetens har haft inflytande över verksamhetens inriktning.

Referenser

Alvunger, D. & Wahlström, N. (Red.) (2018). Den evidensbaserade skolan: svensk skola i skärningspunkten mellan forskning och praktik. Stockholm: Natur & Kultur.

Ansari, D., De Smedt, B., & Grabner, R.H. (2012). Neuroeducation - A critical overview of an emerging field” i Neuroethics, 2012, 5.

American Psychiatric Association (2014). MINI-D 5 Diagnostiska kriterier enligt DSM-5. Stockholm: Pilgrim Press AB.

Carlgren, I. (2011). ”Forskning ja, men vilken slags och i vilket syfte? Om avsaknaden och behovet av en “klinisk” mellanrumsforskning” i Pedagogisk forskning, 15(4), 65–79.

Clark, J. (2015). “Philosophy, Neuroscience and Education” i Educational Philosophy and Theory, 47(1), 36-46.

Clement, N. D. & Lovat, T. (2012). ”Neuroscience and Education: Issues and Challenges for Curriculum” i Curriculum Inquiry, 42(4), 534-557.

Evetts, J. (2009) “Sociological Analysis of Professionalism: Past, Present and Future” i Comparative Sociology 10(1).

Gaussel, M. & Reverdy, C. (2013). Neurosciences et éducation: la bataille des cerveaux. Dossier d’actualité Veille et Analyses IFÈ, n° 86, septembre. Lyon: ENS de Lyon.

Grskovic, A. Janice & Zentall, S. Sydney, (2010). “Understanding ADHD in girls: Identification and social characteristics” i International journal of special education, vol. 25, nr 1, ss. 171-184.

Howard-Jones, P. (2014). “Neuroscience and education: myths and messages” i Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 15, 817-824.

Kitchen, W. H. (2017). Philosophical Reflections on Neuroscience and Education. Bloomsbury Philosophy of Education. London: Bloomsbury.

Levinsson, M. (2013). Evidens och existens: evidensbaserad undervisning i ljuset av lärares erfarenheter (Doktorsavhandling, Göteborg Studies in Educational Sciences, 339). Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.

Mangels, J. A., Butterfield, B., Lamb, J., Good, C., & Dweck. C. S. (2006). “Why do beliefs about intelligence influence learning success? A social cognitive neuroscience model” i Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 1(2), 75- 86.

Michaëlsson, Madeleine, Yuan, Shuai, Melhus, Håkan, Baron, John A, Byberg, Liisa, Larsson, Susanna C. & Michaëlsson, Karl (2022) “The impact and causal directions for the associations between diagnosis of ADHD, socioeconomic status and intelligence by use of a bi-directional two-sample Mendelian randomization design”, BMC Medicine 20:106.

OECD (2002). Understanding the brain: Towards a new learning science. OECD Publishing. OECD. (2007a). Evidence in Education. Linking research and policy. Paris: CERI. OECD (2007b). Understanding the brain: The birth of a learning science. OECD Publishing.

Wollscheid, S. & Opheim, V. (2016). “Knowledge brokering initiatives in education: a systematic map of the Nordic countries” i Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 2(1), 1-18.

Denna studie är ett resultat av det samarbete som inleddes i maj 2020 genom Nätverket för erfarenhetsutbyte kring arbetsintegrerad lärarutbildning. Syftet är att undersöka hur den verksamhetsförlagda utbildningen genomförs i arbetsintegrerade lärarutbildningar vid svenska lärosäten.

Det empiriska underlaget utgörs av en enkät som kombinerats med uppföljande intervjuer och skriftlig kommunikation. Studien utgår från att det finns en lång tradition av motsättningar när det gäller hur utrymmet mellan praktik och teori ska fördelas i lärarutbildningarna. Undersökningen visar att det finns ett brett utbud av lösningar kring VFU inom arbetsintegrerade lärarutbildningar när det gäller form och i viss mån även innehåll. Ett rimligt antagande är att dessa skiftande upplägg bottnar i anpassningar till lokala behov. När det gäller examination av VFU uppger samtliga lärosäten att de bygger sin bedömning på information från en kombination av underlag. Efterfrågan på validering av VFU är mestadels låg eller obefintlig bland de lärosäten som ingår i studien. Anledningen förefaller vara att studenterna upplever momentet som meriterande och att denna bild är spridd mellan studentgrupper. En slutsats från denna studie är att utveckling av förutsättningar för arbetsintegrerade lärarutbildningar bör ske med förståelse för den mångfald av lokala anpassningar som lärosäten navigerar mellan för att uppfylla det konkreta målet att kunna erbjuda denna utbildningsform bland sina utbildningsprogram.  

Il est désormais bien établi que les premières écoles nouvelles ou progressistes (progressiva skolorna) ont été financées par des fonds privés et non publics. C’est ce qu’ont mis en lumière diverses études de cas sur ce type d’écoles, par exemple au Japon et en Angleterre. Cependant, les analyses portant plus spécifiquement sur la nature de ces financements sont rares. L’objectif principal de cet article est d’analyser et de décrire le financement des collèges privés (enskilda läroverk) progressistes par le biais d’une étude de cas incluant deux établissements, à Göteborg et Uppsala, créés à la fin du XIXe siècle.

L’utilisation d’archives, telles que les procès-verbaux des réunions annuelles des actionnaires et les documents comptables, permet de mieux comprendre les motifs de leur création et leurs conditions de fonctionnement. Ces écoles sont au départ financées par une combinaison de dons de philanthropes locaux, de subventions publiques et de frais de scolarité acquittés par les élèves. L’importance du capital philanthropique diminue progressivement. La gestion des établissements n’a pas eu pour but de dégager des profits.éducation progressistephilanthropiecollège privéfinancement des écolesélite locale 

It is a well-known fact that several of the early progressive schools were privately, not publicly, funded. This has been observed in studies of progressive schools in, for instance, Japan and England. However, more specific analyses of the nature of this financing are rare. The overarching purpose of the article is to analyse and describe the funding of progressive private upper secondary schools (läroverk) through a case study including two schools in Gothenburg and Uppsala in the early 1900s. Using primary material, such as minutes from the annual meetings of shareholders and final accounts, a broader understanding of conditions and motives is accomplished. A combination of donations from local philanthropists, public funding, and student fees funded the schools. Gradually, the importance of philanthropic capital decreased. In addition, it also turned out that the schools were hardly driven by profit motives.

In educational contexts and since classic ancient times, we judge the abilities of self-control, focus and attention as desirable personal qualities. Commonly we view uncontrolled expressions of emotion as a sign of the weak-minded and unprincipled who are enslaved by their emotions and bodily needs. This view has stood up through shifting pedagogical paradigms; from Pythagoreans, Epicureans and Pyrrhonism, through the monastic schools of the middle ages and into the era of mass education. Restless and unfocused pupils engage teachers, teacher educators and researchers in order to manage overactive behaviour, lack of impulse control and difficulties in concentration. There are different technology solutions for this challenge, such as behaviour management strategies, social skills training programmes, classroom tools and neuropsychiatric investigations.

Inattention, hyperactivity and impulsiveness also constitute the essential components for the diagnosis of Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Both the diagnosis and medical treatment of ADHD have become highly prevalent during the last two decades but there are considerable regional differences, both within and between countries, in the proportion of children and adolescents with this neuropsychiatric diagnosis. Hitherto, there is however no established objective biological marker for ADHD.

Previous research studies have shown associations between ADHD with lower socioeconomic status on the one hand, and intelligence, on the other hand. For this study, we aimed to evaluate the causal directions and strengths for these associations by use of a bi-directional two-sample Mendelian randomization design.

We used summary‐level data from the largest available genome‐wide association studies (GWAS) to identify genetic instruments for diagnosis of ADHD, intelligence, and socioeconomic markers including the Townsend deprivation index, household income and educational attainment. Effect estimates from individual genetic variants were combined using inverse‐variance weighted regression.

Our results indicate that an ADHD diagnosis may be a direct and strong intelligence-independent consequence of socioeconomic related factors, whereas ADHD appears only to lead to modestly lowered socioeconomic status. Low intelligence seems not to be a major independent cause or consequence of ADHD.

The results of this study raise questions about basic assumptions with long historical roots: 1) how pupils’ conditions and expressions are interpreted in educational contexts and 2) how aristocratic norms relate to educational practice and pedagogical ideals.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have reported associations between attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and lower socioeconomic status and intelligence. We aimed to evaluate the causal directions and strengths for these associations by use of a bi-directional two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) design.

METHODS: We used summary-level data from the largest available genome-wide association studies (GWAS) to identify genetic instruments for ADHD, intelligence, and markers of socioeconomic status including the Townsend deprivation index, household income, and educational attainment. Effect estimates from individual genetic variants were combined using inverse-variance weighted regression.

RESULTS: A genetically predicted one standard deviation (SD) increment in the Townsend deprivation index conferred an odds ratio (OR) of 5.29 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.89-14.76) for an ADHD diagnosis (p<0.001). A genetically predicted one SD higher education level conferred an OR of 0.30 (95% CI 0.25-0.37) (p<0.001), and a genetically predicted one SD higher family income provided an OR of 0.35 (95% CI 0.25-0.49; p<0.001). The associations remained after adjustment for intelligence whereas the lower odds of an ADHD diagnosis with higher intelligence did not persist after adjustment for liability to greater educational attainment (adjusted OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.68-1.56; p=0.87). The MR analysis of the effect of ADHD on socioeconomic markers found that genetic liability to ADHD was statistically associated with each of them (p<0.001) but not intelligence. However, the average change in the socioeconomic markers per doubling of the prevalence of ADHD corresponded only to 0.05-0.06 SD changes.

CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that an ADHD diagnosis may be a direct and strong intelligence-independent consequence of socioeconomic related factors, whereas ADHD appears to lead only to modestly lowered socioeconomic status. Low intelligence seems not to be a major independent cause or consequence of ADHD.

A deeper understanding of the causal links from education level to health outcomes may shed a light for disease prevention. In the present Mendelian randomization study, we found that genetically higher education level was associated with lower risk of major mental disorders and most somatic diseases, independent of intelligence. Higher education level adjusted for intelligence was associated with lower risk of suicide attempts, insomnia, major depressive disorder, heart failure, stroke, coronary artery disease, lung cancer, breast cancer, type 2 diabetes and rheumatoid arthritis but with higher risk of obsessive-compulsive disorder, anorexia nervosa, anxiety, bipolar disorder and prostate cancer. Higher education level was associated with reduced obesity and smoking, which mediated quite an extent of the associations between education level and health outcomes. These findings emphasize the importance of education to reduce the burden of common diseases.